Now given a subgroup
of
generated by a set
the
index of
in
is the same as the index of the
subgroup
generated by
in
.
While it is undecidable whether a subgroup has finite index in a group, TC attempts to verify
whether the index is finite.
In the following we will always assume that the group
and the subgroup
are finitely
presented respectively generated, i.e. the sets
,
R and S are finite.
Detailed descriptions of TC procedures can be found e. g. in [11,3,15].
We only list some of the properties and their interpretations here:
If the index of
in
is finite the procedure halts and produces
a set of coset representatives
and a coset table with entries
for each coset c and each
.
The (unique) coset representative for any word in
can be computed by tracing it through the coset table starting with
.
Moreover, given a total well-founded ordering > on
which is additionally compatible
with right concatenation, we can associate to each coset c the representative
of minimal length4.
The coset table gives rise to a convergent prefix string rewriting system as follows:
To each coset w, each
and the respective coset wa
corresponding to
,
associate a rule5
of the
form
.
This prefix string rewriting system then can be used to determine the coset of a word in
by prefix reduction.
Let us illustrate these findings with an example from [3], page 71:
a | b | a-1 | b-1 | |
![]() |
![]() |
b | ![]() |
b-1 |
b | b-1 | b-1 | ba-1 | ![]() |
b-1 | ba-1 | ![]() |
b | b |
ba-1 | b | ba-1 | b-1 | ba-1 |
The coset representative of the word aba can be deduced by either tracing the coset table:
,
and
,
or
by prefix reduction:
In both cases we find that aba lies in the coset represented by b-1 which is in fact the minimal
representative of this coset with respect to the chosen ordering.